Erollisi Marr - The Nameless

Go Back   Erollisi Marr - The Nameless > NON EQ Stuff (Real life, other games, etc.) > Steam Vent


Reply
 
Add/Share Add/Share Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 04-05-2004, 08:17 AM   #1
Gerick
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 359
Default DU still in use, no masks for our troops, WTF?

http://www.thepowerhour.com/articles/du_effects.htm

why are we still using DU shells?

my own questions are, why are our troops not better protected when we used them in our tanks, rockets and bombs?

how are we going to stop it from hurting the people there when it will be in the air for the next 20ish years simply because its dry and arid there?

why are we using nuclear waste as weapons and who is getting the god damned pay off for it?

side fact: " DU weapons emit Apha paticle dose to a single cell from U-238 which is 50 times the annual dose level."

in lame terms, if a DU partical gets in your lungs, its like getting the rads (radiation) of a chest X-ray 10 to 20 times a second, as rated by the nuclear commission
Gerick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2004, 08:26 AM   #2
chukzombi
The Undead Shaman
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: The Bowels of Hell, A.K.A. New Jersey
Posts: 9,564
What is "The Power Hour?" Sounds like either a gospel program or a Heavy Metal special on MTV during the 80s
__________________
Chukzombi Astrocreep
Magister (re-united)
chukzombi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2004, 08:26 AM   #3
Gerick
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 359
found out a bit more info, cancer rates in the USA are almost as high as 1 in 3.

that is fucking sad.

as for "the power hour"

its a fact finding team, think its a man and his wife, i listen to it now and then on my radio, they do research and have people research current world concerns, such as DU, the prozac levels found in our water now, and the murcery(sp?) levels in last years flu shot that was causing old timers in alot of the elderly who took it, as well as the murcery(sp?) levels in tuna fish(check out the FDA web site, they now say(the FDA) that having 2 cans of albacore a month is the maximum you should have or it can kill you or cause many problems for your glanduler system)

just 2 more talking heads in talk radio, tho they dont pander to the right or left, and focus on more than politcal stuff, at least they have more to say than what they think of the latest gay rights opponent or advocate like Rush(he is a putz)

Last edited by Gerick; 04-05-2004 at 08:33 AM.
Gerick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2004, 08:28 AM   #4
Felessan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 1,005
Because of its inherent density...DU is the most effective armor piercing material in existence.

I cannot address the health concerns...other than if your vehicle gets hit with one you'll have other problems than a particle in your lungs.
__________________
Felessan Oakhallow
Ginsu Stalker of Anlah 'Shok
Retired

"The things we do in life, echo in eternity!"
Felessan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2004, 08:31 AM   #5
Gerick
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 359
LOL yes if you get hit with one your fucked, but im not talking about the enemy at the moment, what im concerned with is our own troops are inhailing this shit daily, and we will have ALOT of people with cancer soon, as well as iraq is going to be cancer ridden for quite some time now as well.
Gerick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2004, 08:42 AM   #6
chukzombi
The Undead Shaman
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: The Bowels of Hell, A.K.A. New Jersey
Posts: 9,564
A mask isnt going to protect you from those roentgens dude
__________________
Chukzombi Astrocreep
Magister (re-united)
chukzombi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2004, 08:45 AM   #7
Gerick
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 359
Gerick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2004, 08:46 AM   #8
crimsonedge
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 767
There is no evidence anywhere that DU is a health concern, in fact there are studies confirming no health risk. Can you post some studies that show there is a health risk ? This article talks a good game but doesnt support any of its conclusions.

Here are some links that are studies that say there is little health risk:

http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Aug1...8_9808107.html

http://usinfo.state.gov/regional/nea...ufactsheet.htm

http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs257/en/

http://www.nato.int/du/home.htm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/1205632.stm
crimsonedge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2004, 09:00 AM   #9
Gerick
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 359
does it need to? i thought that when several governments got togeather and formed a commission that said it was dangerous was enough, also the fact that several MD's support the artical would have been enough, report is also backed and written by Admiral Vishnu Bhagwat,Former Chief of the Naval Staff, India, Dr. Arun Mitra, the IPPNW and several other groups that spend their time being watch dogs on this sort of stuff

as the report i linked said, it didnt cover what DU did you your immune system acurratly, and the past reports of the 1950's were ignored also.

whats wrong with sticking to tungstin?

as for your links, like nato and bbc, do you think they would bash something their nations and mothering countrys use? i bet they wouldnt
Gerick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2004, 09:09 AM   #10
Gerick
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 359
"Depleted uranium (DU) used in Nato weapons in the Balkans has no detectable effect on human health, according a European Union panel of experts."

Hmm first of all, this test was done in a short amount of time, and wasnt detectable, that means to me

1) they didnt check long term effects which is exaclty what most are concerned over, many med's people used to take had no bad effects up front but could cause dangerous health risks 10 years down the road
2) nato approves of the use of DU as a cheap weapon

seems to me there is a vested interest, but anyhow im still reading the rest of them to gauge the value of what the claims are

"toxic nature of the metal itself"

hmm toxic= bad

another thing about this study is they were testing areas that were temperate climates, where the stuff would quickly end up underground from rain, it didnt take into account how long this stuff would stay around in a arid climate, they are not using valid "controls" which any chemist would tell you are needed in any trial or experiment

""Warning signs should be put up where there are large concentrations of depleted uranium," he added.

But he said he did not believe there was a significant health risk to local residents. :

hmm they bombarded citys, i can see it now

"welcome to Tulukalk, pop 20 thousand, WARNING DU ZONE!"

read between the lines a bit, "significant" means they are not all that impressed by the risks it DOES pose, and they will not throw money at it to get rid of it, and they wont advocate the stop of DU usage, to me it sounds like "eh, we dont care, its not all THAT bad"

"In the case of the average back garden, there is as much uranium was you would find in a shell," he said."

this is another case of no shit, uranium turns into lead when it breaks down long enough, DU is almost lead, but still radio active, both are toxic, we stopped using lead paint, when the start and the end are toxic, so is the middle, the scientist even admited it was toxic, "as much uranium" is the no shit part, its why we have carbon 14 and 13, its why we have Up32, its because the stuff changes as it reachs its half life and beyond

we should care more about human life then "eh, we dont care all that much"

Tuesday, 6 March, 2001, 17:36 GMT
No DU weapons risk, say experts
Nato has tested sites where bombs fell in 1999
Depleted uranium (DU) used in Nato weapons in the Balkans has no detectable effect on human health, according a European Union panel of experts.


In the case of the average back garden, there is as much uranium as you would find in a shell

Prof Ian McAulay, EU expert
The European Commission ordered the investigations after claims that veterans of peacekeeping missions in Bosnia and Kosovo had developed illnesses, particularly cancer, after being exposed to depleted uranium used in armour-piercing weapons.

"I don't think there is any reason to be afraid," said Professor Ian McAulay of Dublin's Trinity University, who headed the panel.

However, the experts did not rule out the possibility that the toxic nature of the metal itself might produce ill-effects, but felt there was no evidence to support this.

Precautions

Professor McAulay told reporters that precautions should be taken nonetheless.

Local monitors in the Balkans have also been anxious about possible radiation
He said it would be prudent to remove from the ground DU-tipped rounds that had not hit hard targets and shattered into powder.

"Warning signs should be put up where there are large concentrations of depleted uranium," he added.

But he said he did not believe there was a significant health risk to local residents.

"In the case of the average back garden, there is as much uranium was you would find in a shell," he said.

The report will be studied by all 20 EU commissioners over the next month.

EU Environment Commissioner Margot Wallstroem said the Commission would consider the study when discussing the need for further action on the health and environmental situation in the Balkans.

"Air campaign

The EU panel's findings support Nato's own investigations, which found that there was no link between DU ammunition and cancer among peacekeeping troops. " maybe that has to do with the climate? or that they get rotated out? what about the long term native people?

Last edited by Gerick; 04-05-2004 at 09:20 AM.
Gerick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2004, 09:26 AM   #11
Gerick
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 359
heck i feel the need to go on

"Some other Nato countries also use munitions with DU, which has 40% less radiation than natural uranium, itself not considered a health hazard.:

radiation is still bad for ANYONE, thats like saying that death by beheading is better than death by shock, it still hurts, one just takes a few seconds longer than the other, the amount of rads is what is really important because they STAY in your system, so the amount of rads gets higher and higher.

its okay if your burning to death! the fire your in is 40% cooler than that gas/chemical fire!

in your own artical

"Some experts remain unconvinced.

Malcolm Hooper - emeritus professor of chemistry at the University of Sunderland, and an adviser to UK Gulf War veterans - told BBC News Online that there was no safe level for DU.

"Any inhalation of insoluble depleted uranium is a health hazard. It emits alpha radiation.

"There is published work showing that there is no safety threshold for internal alpha radiation - one alpha particle is enough to cause a mutation in a gene."

mutations in a gene = cancer, i dont care if people are not dying from radiation posioning, cancer is a side effect of these weapons and it is still causing deaths, that doesnt sound benine to me
Gerick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2004, 09:29 AM   #12
chukzombi
The Undead Shaman
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: The Bowels of Hell, A.K.A. New Jersey
Posts: 9,564
radiation is still bad for ANYONE,
Thats a bit of a broad statement
__________________
Chukzombi Astrocreep
Magister (re-united)
chukzombi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2004, 09:30 AM   #13
Gerick
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 359
well unless your trying to kill off certain types of cancer(key word is KILL off)

its not good for a normal healthy person.

all these reports say is "there is not a link because we can not create one by standing someone in a field next to a exploaded shell" first of all, it can take months to years for cancer to form into a identifyable form, second of all, you cant say "lead isnt toxic because if i put someone in a room with a slab of lead they do not get sick" this is moronic science, the kind that i would probibly turned out if i tried to make a report on it, simply standing 2 object togeather and not seeing any changes doesnt mean nothing happend, we cant see air but we know it is there
Gerick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2004, 10:04 AM   #14
ShardmoonVer.1
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Jacksonville
Posts: 7,457
India has a navy?
__________________
If you don't have something good to say about some one, say it loud.
ShardmoonVer.1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2004, 10:07 AM   #15
kanibaal
korpse
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 796
radiation was good for the Hulk. man he was tough.
kanibaal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2004, 10:10 AM   #16
Wildane
Psychopath w/a conscience
 
Wildane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: The Hospitality State, asshole!
Posts: 10,540
India has its own ocean, they'd better have a goddamn navy!
__________________
"I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth." - Umberto Eco

"Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blind-folded fear." - Thomas Jefferson
Wildane is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2004, 10:32 AM   #17
AresProphet
Priest of Hiroshima
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Colorado
Posts: 2,932
Send a message via MSN to AresProphet
Admiral Vishnu Bhagwat
Ok, I had to giggle at that one

Seriously though, DU shells have no proven causal effect, but the correlations between their use and various immune system problems is pretty strong. In every reputable case I've seen on the matter, there are other factors which could be confounding variables, and often are consistently the same between cases.

But if you think about it, it can't be good for you. The argument most scientists/military-types get into is whether the armor-piercing properties are worth the risk: does taking out a tank that much easier necessarily do less damage to the troops in the end?

I'd like to see them gone, but I've been swaying towards the Green party lately...
__________________
One of the wonders of the world is going down
It's going down I know
It's one of the blunders of the world that no-one cares
No-one cares enough


Attachment 181
AresProphet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2004, 10:32 AM   #18
crimsonedge
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 767
First off I didnt bash you I just pointed out articles and STUDIES that showed there is little to no risk so take a chill pill. Second none of the articles and STUDIES I posted bashed anyone they reported their findings. However, the BBC article I linked felt they needed comment from someone that opposed DU usage and that person presented an OPINION not any proof or study that showed it is harmful. You start talking about your OPINION that climate can have an effect on how the uranium is spread into the environment thus limiting its risks. Yet you forget that the US has done long term studies on Gulf War veterans and found no evidence of any health problems associated with DU and these people were in an arid climate correct?

You stated:

hmm they bombarded citys, i can see it now

They dont bombard cities with DU they are used as armor piercing shells for killing tanks and armored fighting vehicles. Try not to spread more rumors.

In any case, Im just asking for some real studies that show there is DU has a potential to cause health problems and I will be much more inclined to believe you and support you case (and scare tactics) for protesting its use.
crimsonedge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2004, 11:07 AM   #19
Gerick
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 359
it has radiation... it mutates cells in the long term(which is what cancer is, mutated cells because they have damaged DNA or RNA from radiation or cancerogins<sp?>)

what more do you need? if i had the money id send a Md to your house to tell you radiation is bad for a normal person, at any levels, ares has it about right, but we have other things that are just as good at blowing up tanks, tungstin, titanium, other heavy metals.

as for my opion on the climate, sorry but that is a fact, particals stay in the air longer in a arid climate, in a high to moderate moisture climate, the DU particals get wet, and dirt and dust sticks to it and pulls it down to the ground, in a arid climate they can stay in the air for a long time, no to mention a dust storm would kick it all back up into the air.

didnt mean to attack you, or bash you with information and opions, but you did challenge the validity of the claims i made and the artical made and you did ask for more so i tried to give you more /shrug i was also just trying to point out the way they worded it, to the average person it says no threat, to someone to reads into it, it says "little threat" or 40% less threat, but that is just so the doctors cant get in trouble for being missleading, honestly, the 40% less rads, "significant health risk" should make that clear, in that they are weighing the risk Vs reward of finishing a war fast, the risk to health was less than the risk of war, but it still isnt right because someone gets to die that didnt play a part in it (like all the mutated babys that will come out of this)

Last edited by Gerick; 04-05-2004 at 11:13 AM.
Gerick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2004, 11:36 AM   #20
crimsonedge
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 767
Here is a very interesting study that goes in depth on assessing the risk to servicemen inhaling DU (and other exposures). Its long but worth reading and will probably help in your concern about the risks associated with DU dust in the climate.


http://www.gulflink.osd.mil/du_ii/du_ii_s07.htm
crimsonedge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2004, 11:40 AM   #21
ShardmoonVer.1
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Jacksonville
Posts: 7,457
Of course he challenged you.... the sources lack credibility in his eyes. He provided what he felt were more credible sources. You opened the discussion based on "facts" but then switched to the common sense argument instead of actual "proof".

The Powerhour? Thats the best name they could come up with?

P.S. Ocean or no ocean, I just cant work up much fear for the Indian Navy. Are you sure its not just another countries Navy that got outsourced?
__________________
If you don't have something good to say about some one, say it loud.
ShardmoonVer.1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2004, 11:43 AM   #22
crimsonedge
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 767
I thought this was pretty funny too although it really has no bearing on his opionions or statements on DU:

Naval chief Vishnu Bhagwat sacked

http://www.secularindia.com/navalchiefsacked.htm
crimsonedge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2004, 07:49 PM   #23
Strijder
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 12
radiation is still bad for ANYONE


Then go outside and quit staring at your computer monitor! You're going to kill yourself by bathing in the electron stream :b

hmm toxic= bad


Ever use bleach, Draino, or any other cleaning chemicals? Seen that battery acid under your hood?

Anything can kill you, depending on the dosage.
Strijder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2004, 11:40 PM   #24
Gerick
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 359
normally your body can pass that stuff OUT of your system in small doses, the rads can stick with you for years because it sets off chain reactions in your cells as the nutrons fire off and hit eachother, the metal is bad because chemically its toxic and the radation is another form of toxisity, and you body cant break down the little amount you inhale, so basically its like esbestose that also "microwaves" you.

i can remember how esbestose was "safe" and lead paint was "safe" for the longest time
Gerick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-2004, 04:35 AM   #25
Ramesses Elliscer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 160
Send a message via Yahoo to Ramesses Elliscer
Hi there Gerik,
I am a 74D in the US army currently serving in Iraq, thats a Chemical Operations Specialst or NBC specialist if you prefer.
DU in the armor piercing rounds is not a threat in the day to day handling, it Becomes a threat once it oxidizes or once it impacts when used.

US policy as far as I know once you come in contact with suspected DU sites is to mask, mark the site and get away. Even though short term risks may or may not be there is no way we know anything about the long term risks, way to early to tell no that.

As far as breathing it in, a simple cloth over your mouth will prevent you from inhaling the particles, but we always do use our protective masks, better safe than sorry.

Lastly, the benefits of using DU rounds, in the big wigs eyes, simple outweigh the loss of a few lives. Thatís why we have certain terms as allowable casualties...

Hope that helped some.
__________________
Ramesses Elliscer
Paladin of the 65th Blade
Eternal Crusaders

I hate war as only a soldier who has lived it can, only as one who has seen its brutality, its futility, its stupidity.
General Dwight D. Eisenhower
Ramesses Elliscer is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 08:41 PM.


Powered by: vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.